Printed Books Return to Classrooms: Why Print Plus Digital Serves Students Best

For most of the last decade, the future of the classroom was assumed to be a screen. Sweden, among the countries most committed to that vision, has since reversed part of it. Device use had expanded from around 2010, and when reading and maths results in the OECD's PISA assessments fell between 2018 and 2022, a government-commissioned review concluded that heavy device use could weaken attention and concentration, particularly in younger children. From 2023 the government steered schools back toward paper and set aside hundreds of millions of kronor a year for printed textbooks and other teaching materials.

Researchers point to other causes for the decline, among them changes in the student population, and Sweden never banned screens. What it withdrew was the assumption that a device could stand in for a book.

What the research says

That assumption rested on thinner evidence than its popularity implied. A 2018 meta analysis in Educational Research Review pooled 54 studies and 171,055 participants and found that readers understood texts somewhat better on paper. The effect was small, but it grew when readers were pressed for time, and it held for informational texts while disappearing in studies that used narrative texts alone. A textbook is an informational text, and the students who read it are often racing a deadline, so the finding lands squarely on school publishing. UNESCO's 2023 Global Education Monitoring Report strikes a similar note of caution. It found little solid evidence of digital technology's added value in education, observed that much of the evidence comes from those selling it, and concluded only that some technology can improve some types of learning in some contexts. In 14 countries, it added, the mere presence of a mobile device nearby distracted students and harmed their learning.

The case for blended learning

None of this makes a case against screens. The same report credits accessible technology with opening opportunities for learners with disabilities: a student who needs text enlarged or read aloud can do neither with a printed page. Digital editions also bring search, audio, captions and practice exercises that paper cannot match. Print has strengths of its own. It suits sustained reading, annotation and revision, the slow work of making an argument one's own. The fair reading of the evidence is that each format does a different job, and that a student with access to both is better served than one confined to either.

That is the case for blended learning, and it is a modest one. It does not claim that print will replace tablets. It claims that schools decide better when the format follows the task, and that results, not the quantity of equipment, should be the measure. A principal at a Stockholm school described the aim as finding the right balance between digital and traditional teaching, and it is hard to improve on that.

What it means for publishers

For publishers the consequence is practical. Schools and ministries will want print and digital editions of the same title, each suited to its purpose, and the two must agree. The content and page numbers have to match, so that when a teacher says "turn to page 42" every student arrives at the same place. The digital edition needs to be accessible from the start, with real structure, described images and clean metadata.

S4Carlisle helps education publishers produce print and digital editions from the same content, with accessibility built into the digital files rather than added at the end. With Benetech GCA certification and more than 50 years in publishing, our team works across both formats.

To plan a print and digital programme for your school list, visit s4carlisle.com or contact sales@s4carlisle.com.